






















0 


^y 0 ( c{/j»ur * ^ „ ®Sr§ * a^ on/ :rVk * ^ °^. 

A *'o m >** J *o **??«** a, <v 6^ 

* i* "Jo!* *V f 0* ,*^ % * l J/j* A*> A* ••■•• 

* jr/r/7^ -y ^ s *^N\V\^v ^ ^ *N *0mfa? 9 ^ y* 

^ A oa^Pi« ^ 0 ^ ^ A 

*° Ay * 

, - «^~v A ^ % 

\V ^ * * » ' • £° ^ — <' 

"*. V A 0 A&&. * . v .‘i*i*. <* ^ 



$>* *®«0° 


* A 




“ f ^ ^ 

A vD *'/.** A 

V A « o *U A > 





•Co. A 


\/A 


♦ J) 

C\ * 9 V *»V.^ 


o 

» A V -a 

™r»‘ ^ ^ 

A < 

A^ • 1 1 4 * 

% ° VT * 

: ^ 0 v ; 

* 3,° V*> 

> Jy ^ * 

* ^</~v A ^ 

v • I* 0 * c* Sr A> \ 

' \ dF '‘jSSfe' ** ** 

<A Ar> - O aV«\ o * <A *^Vv 

4 y\ # * a v *>*. k w/ \\r * c? JV 

O ^TlT* a <v -<r„?* <G V A 


4 ^ , 1 * * <£ 

o 0* ,>u;, *, 

: '*b& :A&'^ ^ a 





• a- 





4 ^ * t * 6 + pj^ 

% -o ,>;w. -t, c° • 

«• ^ 4 *^ S ^ *P> ^ 

• C> V • ^ ^ /vf 




V x° ^ « 

^ rv y ^*. * 

.-•’ / V'*.^T« .<?■ -. 

V f a « • O . r O «S • • * 4 > y a o 

^ .^v* v * y*®*- \ y % , 

% JS\\A2&//A O 'J'- /- 


w 


,<b vp. ; 

«? ^ * 
^. v ci» «►. 

G %r> 




A^> * 

^ ** x V V 
. ' *. s % A <^ * 

oO" 0 -. ^O A.^’ - t/# ^ ^ 

• O •l'P t_/v?-z_ « 'P 

' ^ .V ^ « 

* ° V- « * v* O' 

• 0^ 




> X *7-, ^ 

,. * A ^*. - 

A) + * 



* d? ^ 

4 A 7 ^ 

<0 O, ^o.S 8 ,r 

V o A* o *^_ A , 

0° • 6 JWa* °o .A^ t* 1 - -» ! 




°v 6 A 0 t ^'<V -> 

Xa A v i «• ^ A 

<#> .c^ . ^ 


v S> 0 ‘ 7 rf- 
+ -0 «* 

» ^0 ^ -* 



A' .0 «, 

aA /\*p t 

V ♦ jA^vT /Vi o A ♦ 

; ^ v • 

A : 

* 







:♦ ■> 


O e * 


* A 

* <v Ac, 

4 A 


o l ' S „ **5> 

\ "° a* s*<mi; % o • 



* •Mymjr.' >° ' 3 *ifc "J^S^S 4 ’* 0 ^ 

<V &2w* % * o 0 if. *>^.» ^ 

^ " ’ A 0 V, * o . • » ^ 

- ^ a° -i;;. % *> ' 

° ^ ♦'#&!%". ij, a> .' 

: v-sr 

.* .s s V 

. - - a 4 *1* -» 

*N' y, '”'* A C ’ \ . 

4 V , l 1 « <^. /V |> N q fr^ A > 

^ ♦ A 





rx y ^ -. 

4 ® ' 1 ^ v ' ' <> " o H o 

- c\ ,9 ,»•’% Ay 

v. yy ^ a 




. \,^s 







V"'o^— ^ V l( . <^*'-***^ 

\N * j&rflTT?*' C •jsSSX^* O -r <\ U . 


^vrv 


o <,5 ^ * A v\ 

'NT * X^Y/Uif? v <#U * 

%> *««<>» ^ °*. *AU A 0 ^ » 

*<■. ■> V N ,"°.o sy »*•• - u. 

•*- •«• %, A*> .yf * a .«, ► 





o. v 'T.s* A w 

O' o # ?» 4 o^ .• x ‘ ,a * ^ 

“ *b? :£M&n°< v-o 



a ^ : 

^ ..; * 1 .<? X ■ *, 

0^ c 0 I* 9 ^ 

€" 



* ^ 


s * A / ^ 

• A v .t... V'” 0 * 
.•T ♦WZfe.* U c° . 

V . j*• v* Cr 


’ -t, c . 

: ^ 0< ° 

v° ^ °-* \ 

O + • 

* » • ’ • A 0 

••-••' %. A?\ 

cv' * 

;j ^ 't'V 

- ‘ > . aVvV t 



^5 -V 

•Z* * * 5 A 





» .pU ^"V - 

r* r% a ^//aj^ * ^ •*** * 

o N o ^> O * * I 1 • ’ '^> ^ 

V • **•* CV - <0 **V # * V 

.*I&A 0 o V .VfilfcV. ^ 


a «/>. : 

* <fr ^ 

** <6 ’V v 

O V r o " a „ ^ 

C U o 

o* • 




o. T <r, s* a 




* & - 

* Xp • 

A -'o • * * ,G^ 


4 V B fc • a v. (J M o ^' , 

^ ,'^nT/P' %r c° •‘U^fvl-. J 

^dsmX^ * *P, <t ' 

: i. 0 At* -WiSv 

' 0 ^ •OWW.' 4^ o 0 -.'W<« r ,* O o 


<* V7 

V 



^ f 0- ' V" 

•». V ,0 * S 'A,'» *> V 

A*^ .^^4^5^’' v>>. «, *• 

1 <> vV * * 

: vv 



- - J* *' 

* v A *> 

• o V 

\Q <7*) 

O' ^riA 

«p^V 

^ *•<’•■ a 0 ' .. 'P % 


O f 



° ^fs <V 

« Ar* C, s 



o 

.V<\ * <» A vP 

*^a A/ ?'■} Ur » A 'JV • 

* '* ,<x. v \z. -» 

s s A <X 'o. >* A v s 

^ f o k o o .;°^, 'o 

N ~ ^ 4 # cSSS^t\^8L * ^ .A 


U 0 ^ 


^ > UP 





A ^o 5 u, N ^‘ ■ * 

c*. .0 V *‘VL'» > v v »•*«- o, 


» A - 

^\K» 4? ^ ■> 

^^ U **w a 

>o^ .*L*.,V 

0 • . o 



• ^ ^ >- 


o 





* ' /'A*" 4 -.“J Ai- A 

,o At> ^ 

^ ^ ^ AK - 

- * 

C* 4 f\ 



« 4? . 

* *S 2»^'* .«- V - 

'° • * A° V 

0 • 

V 
O 

0 ^ ”* 

0 °<u & °''' ^° 

> * * • ®* c\ <0^ 

A ’ f A ^ V 5 X ^ 

V 1 4 jA K» A ° tv 1 * 

o 


































































' ' ' - • - : . 

f- •• ' ,: J :* v .«• • *• ., ..• ■'.•?;■-■. h ••••; ; s: llv ->Wt#Si 


' f •: * 4 '•' L'. (? HE? - '■ MEM' J W• ■ •. ^ 

PUBLICATIONS OF 

The American Academy of Political and Social Science. 

No. 252. 


Issued Fortnightly. 


May 30, 1899. 


&CS~TL -* 

V-.S 

• ' 




Tendencies in Primary 
Legislation. 



mpwmm 




BY 


Walter J. Branson, Ph. D. 


i' 



w.ij t- **V< /■? ^ 


PH 'V I! . 




^ PAPER SUBMITTED TO THE 
AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE 




<v->; 






PHILADELPHIA 

AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE. 


U" 

SMi 


England: P. S. King & Son, * Great Smith St., Westminster, London, S. W. 

France: L. Larose, rue Soufflot aa, Paris. 

Germany: Mayer & Muller, a Prim Louis Ferdinandstrasse, Berlin, N. W. 

Tt a i v : Direzione del Giornale degli Economists, Rome, via Monte Savello, Palazzo Orsini. 
Spain : E. Capdevillu, 0 Plaza de Santa Afia, Madrid, 




Pries, /$ cents, 


Annual Subscription, $6joo. 






Publications on 


>- 


Local and Municipal Government 


Political and Municipal Legislation in i8gs [ 

By Prof. E. Dana Durand, Stanford 

University.Pp. 15. Price, 25 Cents. 

Political and Municipal Legislation in i8g6. 

By Prof. E. Dana Durand, Stanford 

University .Pp. 15. Price, 15 Cents. 

Political and Municipal Legislation in i8g?. 

By Prof. E. Dana Durand, Stanford 

University.Pp. 17. Price, 15 Cents. 

■ 

Political and Municipal Legislation in i8g8. 

By Prof. E. Dana Durand, Stanford 

University.Pp. 18. Price, 15 Cents. 

The Municipality and the Gas Supply. 

By Prof. L. S. Rowe, University of 

Pennsylvania.Pp. 23. Price, 25 Cents. 

Administrative Centralization and Decentralization 
in England. 

By Dr. James T. Young, University of 

Pennsylvania.Pp. 19. Price, 25 Cents. 

Administrative Centralization and Decentralization 
in France. 

By Dr. James T. Young, University of 

Pennsylvania.Pp. 20. Price, 25 Cents. 

The Greater New York Charter. 

By James W. Pryor, Esq., New York . . Pp. 13. Price, 25 Cents. 

Representation in New England Legislatures. 

By Dr. Geo. H. Haynes, Worcester Poly¬ 
technic Institute.Pp. 14. Price, 15 Cents. 

State Supervision for Cities. 

By Prof. J. R. Commons, Syracuse Uni¬ 
versity .Pp. 17. Price, 15 Cents. 

The Problems of Municipal Government. 

By E. L. Godkin, New York .Pp. 26. Price, 25 Cents. 

Reform of Our State Government. 

By Gamaliel Bradford, Boston . . . . Pp. 21. Price, 25 Cents. 

Uniform State Legislation. 

By Frederic J. Stimson, Esq., Boston . Pp. 36. Price, 35 Cents. 


COMPLETE LIST SENT ON APPLICATION 


American Academy of Political and Social Science 


STATION B. PHILADELPHIA 



















63 


TENDENCIES IN PRIMARY LEGISLATION. 


.01. Alios ‘4V* 


.1 


47436 


TENDENCIES IN PRIMARY LEGISLATION. 

In few departments of legislation do the states of the 
Union show greater diversity than in their primary election 
laws. These laws in some cases are made applicable to 
particular cities or counties only; in others, to the entire 
state. The operation of several of them is dependent upon 
acceptance by party committees or by the electors in local 
administrative divisions; while the greater number are 
mandatory. Moreover they differ in content no less than 
in the range of their application. In a number of states 
they simply impose penalties for corrupt practices, leaving 
to the party the development of a nominating system. In 
others, these negative provisions are supplemented by posi¬ 
tive rules to govern the procedure at primary elections. 
Finally, four states have removed the primary from the 
jurisdiction of the party committee and placed it under the 
authority of a Board of Election Commissioners or some 
similar body. In view of the general tendency toward 
uniform legislation, such diversity in the treatment of the 
nominating problem may well excite surprise. 

It is evident, however, from the history of primary legis¬ 
lation that this lack of uniformity is a result not of diverse 
tendencies but of the unequal progress which different 
states have made in a common course of development. The 
more primitive types of legislation, which now prevail in 
a majority of the states, correspond to the early stages in 
the evolution of the more advanced systems. This will 
become apparent as we trace the course of development in 
Ohio and New York—the states in which the movement 
has been carried farthest—and then take a general survey 
of existing legislation. 

In Ohio the first primary election law, passed in 1871, 
seems to have been designed to strengthen, rather than to 
supersede, the authority of the party committee. It offered 






Tendencies in Primary Legislation. 


57 


to political parties, but did not require them to accept, the 
privilege of conducting primary elections under a system 
of rules prescribed and enforceable by law. As this act 
(or rather the earlier California act of which it is a literal 
copy) has served as a model for subsequent legislation in 
several other states, an outline of its essential provisions 
will be of interest. 

I. Elections of voluntary political associations may be called by a 
published notice which shall state: 

(1) The purpose, time, manner and conditions. 

(2) The authority by which the call is issued. 

(3) The name of a legal voter to act as “supervisor” of 

the election. 

(4) The qualifications of voters, which must not be incon¬ 

sistent with those expressed in the act. 

II. The supervisor must take an oath to the effect that he is a legal 
voter of the district and will faithfully conduct the election and can¬ 
vass and report the votes cast, as required by the authority calling 
the election. 

He shall cause the qualified electors present to choose two judges 
and two clerks, and administer to each of them the same oath taken 
by himself. 

III. Any qualified elector may challenge a voter on the ground: 

(1) That he is not entitled to vote under the terms of the call. 

(2) That he is not a citizen of the United States and a quali¬ 

fied elector of the district. 

(3) That he has received or been promised a bribe. 

(4) That he has previously voted on the same day. 

The supervisor or one of the judges must interrogate the challenged 
voter under oath. If he refuse to answer, his vote must be rejected ; 
but if he answer the questions satisfactorily and be not successfully 
contradicted by the sworn testimony of others, it must be accepted. 

IV. Violation of the act by the “supervisor” or judges, as also 
fraud or bribery committed by electors, are made misdemeanors. 

V. The act is applicable only when the published notice so states. * 

In 1886 an amendment f was added, enabling party com¬ 
mittees in Cincinnati to proceed a step further towards the 
legalization of the nominating system. It provided that, in 

* Act of February 24, 1871. Vide , Table of Laws, seq . 

f Act of May 17, 1886. 


[347] 


5 » 


Annaes of the American Academy. 


cities of the first grade of the first class, primary elections, 
when advertised as required by law, should be conducted 
at public expense, in accordance with the election code, 
by the judges and clerks of election belonging to the respec¬ 
tive political parties. Two years later * this provision, 
slightly modified, was extended to Cleveland, Columbus, 
Toledo and Dayton. And again in 1898 came another spe¬ 
cial act f applicable to Cincinnati which places the prima¬ 
ries permanently under the authority of the Board of 
Elections. 

By a quite different process New York has developed a 
similar system. Primary legislation in the Empire State 
began in 1866 { with a short paragraph making bribery or 
menace a misdemeanor. The next act § prescribed penal¬ 
ties for various kinds of fraud and also a number of positive 
rules to be observed at primary elections. Originally 
limited in application to the counties in which Brooklyn 
and Buffalo are situated, it was subsequently applied to 
the entire state. || In 1887 the primaries in cities of over 
10,000 inhabitants were placed under a quite elaborate 
system of positive rules,U which, five years later, were 
extended to cities of 5,000.** And finally in 1898 the duty 
of conducting primary elections in cities having a popula¬ 
tion of over 50,000 was made a state function.tt 

In the foregoing sketch we see: (1) That acts originally 
applicable only to the principal cities are subsequently 
extended to larger areas; and (2) that successive enactments 
for the same territory show a progressive subjection of the 
primaries to public authority. 

* Act of April 16, 1888. 

f Act of April 25, 1898. This act was declared invalid on technical grounds in a 
case reported as this article was going to press. Vide , City of Cincinnati v. Mem¬ 
bers of the Board of Elections, Weekly Law Bulletin , March 27, 1899. 
t Act of April 24, 1866. 
g Act of May 13, 1882. 

| Act of May 11, 1883. 

^ Act of May 2, 1887. 

** Act of May 18, 1892. 
ft Act of March 29, 1898. 

[348] 



Tendencies in Primary Legislation. 


59 


Turning to other states, and confining our attention to 
the most advanced enactments in each, the early stages of 
a similar development may be seen. As a rule, the first 
act is characterized by the effort to avoid impairing the 
authority of the party over its own affairs. The provisions 
are either purely negative—penalties for corrupt prac¬ 
tices, etc.—as was the case in New York; or, like the 
first Ohio law, valid only after acceptance by the party 
authorities. Of the states which may be said to have taken 
but the first step in primary legislation, Colorado,* Connec¬ 
ticut,! Iowa ,t Indiana,§ Louisiana,! North Dakota^]" and 
Texas** have adopted the former course, while Arkansas, ff 
California,It Florida,§§ Kansas |||| and West Virignia^[ 
have taken the latter. 

The legislatures of eighteen states have advanced a step 
further, passing mandatory acts which not only prohibit 
corrupt practices but prescribe in greater or less detail the 
procedure to be observed at primary elections. Though 
classed together, as embodying the same principle, these acts 
present a striking variety of detail. In eight states*** the 
provisions are so meagre as to leave the authority of the party 
committee practically unrestricted. In Michigan,Iff Minne¬ 
sota, HI Oregon §§§ and Washington, || || || the law prescribes 


* Act of April 4. 1887. 
f Act of May i, 1883. 
j Act of April 7, 1898. 

§ Act of March 9, 1889. 

|| Act of July 5, 1890. 

f Dakota Ter., Act of March 13, 1885. N. D. Act ot March 20, 1890. 

** Act of April 8, 1895. 
ft Act of April 20,1895. 

Jt Political Code of 1874. Title II, chap. IV. 
gg Act of June n, 1897. 

HU Act of March 10, 1891. 

H Act of March 5, 1891. 

*** Georgia Act of October 21, 1891; Maine Act of March 3, 1887; Maine Act of 
March 26,1897; Montana Annotated Code; Nebraska Act of March 26,1887; Nevada 
Act of February 5, 1883, New Jersey Act of May 9, 1884; Pennsylvania Act of June 
29, 1881, South Carolina Act of December 22, 1888. 
fft Act of May 13, 1895, Act of May 16, 1895. 

Act of April 25, 1895. 
ggg Act of February 11, 1891. 

IJfl Act of March 21, 1895. 


[349] 


6 o 


Annaes of the American Academy. 


a few general rules of procedure; while acts in force in Ken¬ 
tucky, * Mississippi, f and the cities of Boston, | Milwaukee, § 
Richmond, || and Wilmington,If make provision for nearly 
all details. 

In a number of these acts we see a tendency to place the 
primary on a legal equality with the regular election. 
Thus in Kentucky,** and Washington ft and in the cities 
of Boston, Richmond,§§ Milwaukee |||| and Wilming¬ 
ton ^f^f the use of a blanket ballot is required. In the 
city of Richmond*** the judges and clerks have the same 
‘‘rights, powers and privileges ,, and are subject to the 
same penalties as election officers. While in Kentucky,fff 
Mississippi | and in the city of Boston, §§§ primary elec¬ 
tions must in all points not otherwise provided for be con¬ 
ducted according to the election law. 

Still more significant of the trend of development is the 
assignment of various duties connected with the primaries 
to the public officials who perform analogous functions 
under the electoral systems. In Boston, 111111 Detroit Ilf If If and 


* Act of June 30, 1892. 

| Annotated Code of 1892, chap. 105. 

t Act of June 5,1895. Applies to Boston and other cities which adopt it. Embodied 
in the Election Code of 1898 (chap. 548 of the Laws of 1898), as sections 99-131. 

g Act of April 23, 1897. Applicable to counties having over 200,000 inhabitants 
(Milwaukee), cities of the first and second classes, and cities of the third and fourth 
class when adopted by popular vote. 

J Act of February 20, 1896. Applies to Henrico County (Richmond). 

^ Act of May 27,1897. Applicable to New Castle County (Wilmington). 

** Act of June 30, 1892, § 1564. 

ft Act of March 21, 1895, gg 9, 10. 

t* Election Code of 1898, gg 117, 118. 

Act of February 20, 1896, g 6. 

1111 Act of April 23, 1897, gg 6, 8. 

Ilf Act of May 27, 1897, § 39. 

*** Act of February 20, 1896, g 4. Similar provision occurs in the Act of March 3, 
1892, applicable to Portsmouth, the Act of March 3, 1896. applicable to Accomac 
and Northampton Counties; and the Act of January 12, 1898, applicable to Char¬ 
lottesville. 

ttt Act of June 30, 1892, gg 1551, 1560, 1562, 1564. 

Jt J Annotated Code of 1892, chap 105, g 13. 

ggg Election Code of 1898. gg 121, 127. 

. RIH Election Code of 1898. g 105. 

Act of May 16, 1895, g 4. 


[350] 


Tendencies in Primary Legislation. 6i 

the larger cities of Wisconsin * the regular election booths 
are erected and ballot boxes provided at public expense. 
The registering officers are required in Wilmington,! Del., 
to provide special “voting books” for primary elections, and 
in Kentucky t to register the party affiliation of voters. In 
Boston official primary ballots are printed by the Election 
Commissioners, who are further authorized to preserve the 
ballots used at the primary and, in case of a contest, transmit 
them to the * 1 Registrars of Voters’ ’ for an official count. § 
Finally under the Virginia act || applicable to Richmond 
the primary officers are appointed by the county judge from 
lists submitted by the candidates; and in the city of Wil¬ 
mington,^ they, together with an official known as the 
“Qualifier of Primary Election Officers” are paid for their 
services at public expense. 

The principle, of which a partial application appears in 
the foregoing acts, has been logically carried out in Mis¬ 
souri and Illinois, as well as in Ohio and New York, by 
acts transferring practically the entire management of 
primary elections to public authority. 

This step was first taken in Missouri. An act of April 
18, 1891,** applicable to St. Louis directs the *‘Recorder of 
Voters” to fix the time for holding primaries; divide each 
ward into primary districts; designate polling places; pre¬ 
pare official primary ballots; appoint judges and clerks from 
lists submitted by the candidates; provide the necessary 
election paraphernalia; and issue certificates of election to 
the persons receiving the highest number of votes. The 
expenses are paid from the proceeds of an assessment levied 
upon all persons whose names are printed on the ballots. 

* Act of April 23, 1897, g 4. 
t Act of May 27, 1897, gg 11, 19. 
j Act of June 30, 1892, g 1555. 
g Election Code of 1898, gg 117, 126. 

| Act of February 20, 1896, g 4. 

If Act of May 27, 1897, gg 7, 35. 

** Applicable to political parties that polled more than one-fourth of the total 
vote at the preceding election. 

[351] 


62 


Annans of thf American Academy. 


Two years after the passage of this act its application was 
extended to Kansas City,* and in 1897 a new but similar 
law f was enacted for St. Touis. 

Aside from the general principle which it embodies, the 
chief points to be noted in the primary legislation of Mis¬ 
souri are: (1) No rule is provided to distinguish the mem¬ 
bers of different parties; (2) the provisions are, in the 
main, general, leaving to the Recorder of Voters a wide 
field of discretion. 

The Illinois law, t likewise, fails to prescribe a test of 
party membership, but in definite provision for matters of 
detail it marks a long step in advance. For the most part, 
the primary is conducted exactly as a regular election. A 
, few preliminary matters are left to the discretion of the 
party authorities. Thus the committee is permitted, within 
limits prescribed by the law, to name a day for the primary, 
apportion the territory into primary districts, locate polling 
places, and also to select, from the judges and clerks of the 
election precincts within the district, three judges and two 
clerks to serve at the primary. § But having performed 
these functions, its part is done. Thereafter, the primary 
is subject to the authority of the Board of Election Com¬ 
missioners; and, with the exception of official ballots, it is 
conducted with the same formalities as a general election. || 

The act If in force in Cincinnati, Ohio, shows a still more 
complete application of the electoral system to the prima¬ 
ries. It establishes a general primary election for all par¬ 
ties, subject to all the provisions of the election law, except 
that separate ballot boxes and separate official ballots are 
provided for each organization participating. 

To general features similar to those of the Cincinnati act, 

♦Act of April 19, 1893. 

f Act of March 5, 1897. 

t Act of February 10, 1898. 

§ Ibid., § 5. 

II Ibid ., § 8. 

If Act of April 25, 1898, Vide note p. 58, supra. 

[352] 


Tendencies in Primary Legislation. 63 

the New York law * adds a party enrollment and a definite 
test of party membership. The system of party enrollment 
is a modified form of a plan devised in Kentucky, f When a 
voter presents himself for registration, the inspectors after 
recording his name and address as heretofore, ask the 
question: “Do you desire to enroll for the purpose of par¬ 
ticipating in the primary elections of any party?” If he 
answer in the negative or decline to answer, the word 
“No” is written in the appropriate column; but if the 
answer be affirmative, the word “Yes” is written in the 
same place and the further question asked: “With what 
political party do you wish to enroll?” If not challenged, 
the voter is entitled to enrollment in the party he desig¬ 
nates. But if challenged, he must make a declaration cov¬ 
ering three points: (1) That he is in general sympathy with 
the principles of the party; (2) that he intends to support 
its candidates “generally” at the ensuing election and, (3) 
that he has not enrolled with or voted at the primary elec¬ 
tions or conventions of any other party since the “first day 
of last year. ’ ’ $ 

In consequence of the last declaration, the voter who de¬ 
sires to change his party affiliation, at the regular time of 
registration in October, must have passed a year and nine 
months without claiming membership in any party. At a 
supplemental enrollment § held in the following May, the 
period of probation is five months shorter, only sixteen 
months having at that time elapsed since the first day of the 
preceding year. The rolls thus made up in October and sup¬ 
plemented in May are used in even years at a primary 
held on the first Tuesday in June to elect delegates to the 
state conventions, and annually at the September primaries. || 
Under the New York law the primaries of all parties are 

* Act of March 29, 1898. 

f Act of June 30, 1892, § 1555. 

} Act of March 29, 1898. Paragraph 3, Subdivision 2. 

\ Ibid ., Paragraph 3, Subdivision 5. 

1 Ibid., Paragraph 3, Subdivision 7. Paragraph 4, Subdivisions 1 and 2. 

[353] 


6 4 


Annals of the American Academy. 


conducted at public expense by regular election inspectors, 
though not, as in Cincinnati, at the same place. Each 
primary district consists of two election precincts, and 
therefore includes two polling places. At one the inspec¬ 
tors and clerks belonging to the party which polled the 
largest vote at the last election, conduct a primary for the 
exclusive benefit of their own organization; while at the 
other a general primary for all remaining parties is con¬ 
ducted by the minority inspectors and clerks. The inspec¬ 
tors at both polling places have copies of the registration 
books containing the party enrollment; and affiliation with 
each organization is restricted to persons enrolled with it. 
But the vote of a duly enrolled elector, still a resident of 
the district, cannot on any ground be refused.* 

One of the most interesting features of this act is the 
method of voting which insures secrecy without an official 
ballot. The ballots of different parties are distinguishable by 
color; but those intended for the same party are of identical 
color, weight and texture and therefore when folded cannot 
be distinguished from one another. All candidates so 
desiring deposit their ballots with the election officers. 
When a voter presents himself and is found duly enrolled, 
he is given one ballot from each lot deposited for the use of 
his party, and retires to a booth. Returning with all the 
ballots folded, he delivers to an inspector the one he intends 
to cast, and then, waiting till it is in the ballot box, returns 
all the others, which are placed in another box and after¬ 
ward burned without examination. As no one can tell by 
observation which of the ballots given the elector was placed 
in the ballot box, secrecy is secured, f The other features of 
the act are for the most part similar to analogous provisions 
of the election law. 

The foregoing sketch indicates the salient features of the 
primary legislation in force at the close of 1898. Amid all 

* Act of March 29, 1898, Paragraphs 5. 6 and 7. 

t Ibid., Paragraph 7, Subdivision 1. 

[354] 


Tendencies in Primary Legislation. 


65 


the variety of detail we see little more than the application 
of methods in vogue at the regular election. Problems 
which because peculiar to the primary, are incapable of 
solution through forms borrowed from the electoral sys¬ 
tem, have usually been neglected. 

The most conspicuous instance is the qualification for 
voting at primary elections. On this point most acts are 
very indefinite. Several states merely restrict participation 
to “legal electors;" * others to “legal electors possessing 
such additional qualifications as the party committee may 
prescribe;" t while Illinois, J Maine,§ Michigan,|| Mis¬ 
souri (St. Louis) and Ohio (Cincinnati) H add such vague 
and meaningess provisions as “none but members of the 
party" or only persons who have “before affiliated with the 
party" shall be permitted to vote. What shall be the test 
of party membership only three or four states seriously 
attempt to determine. Under the Wisconsin** act all who 
supported the party ticket at the last election are eligible to 
vote at the primary. The principal test prescribed by the 
New York law though different in form is similar in effect. 
The voter declares when applying for party enrollment that 
he intends to support the ticket “generally" at next elec¬ 
tion. tt But as the roll then made up is not used at a primary 
until several months later, by which time “the next elec¬ 
tion," to which declaration referred, has become “the last 
election," the condition is really the same as in Wisconsin. 

Under the Montana laws a challenged voter is offered the 
alternative of swearing that he has been in the past identi¬ 
fied with the party, or that he intends to act with it at the 

♦ Arkansas, Michigan, Missouri, North Dakota and Texas. The provision of the 
Oregon law is substantially the same. 

t Delaware, Florida, Kansas, Kentucky. Maine, Massachusetts, Mississippi, 
Nevada, Ohio, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming. 

I Act of February 10, 1898, g n. 

g Act of March 26, 1897, g 4. 

| Act of May 13, 1895, gg 7, 8, and Act of May 16, 1895, g 9 . 

H Act of April 25, 1898, g 4. 

** Act of April 23, 1897, g 8. 

ft Act of March 29, 1898, Vide, supra . 

[355] 


66 Annals of the American Academy. 

ensuing election; while Minnesota * requires a declaration 
covering both the past and the future. Such rules are sat¬ 
isfactory to the partisan but preclude independent voting 
on election day. A recent California law,t which has been 
declared invalid by the State Supreme Court, t effected an 
interesting compromise between the claims of the strict par¬ 
tisan and the independent. The act of voting was legally con¬ 
strued as the declaration of a bona fide present intention to 
support the party ticket at the ensuing election. Such a 
present intention might, of course, be honorably changed 
after the nominations had been made. 

It is not surprising that State legislatures have avoided 
the problem of defining party membership. Simple as it 
may appear, it is hardly capable of a satisfactory solution. 
While, for obvious reasons, those who do not intend to sup¬ 
port the candidates of a party should be excluded from its 
primary; it is impossible to enforce such a restriction with¬ 
out denying the citizen that freedom of choice on election day 
which our political system contemplates. If we require 
the voter to promise in advance to support the nominees 
of the party in whose primary he participates, we obviously 
either prevent independent voting or deprive independent 
voters of all influence over party nominations. Similarly 
when affiliation with the party at the last election is made 
the test, the voter is tempted to support unfit candidates in 
order to maintain his party standing. On the other hand, 
if we would freely permit independent voting, we must 
allow citizens to vote at a primary without assuming any 
obligation to abide by its action. The interests of the pri¬ 
mary and of the regular election being thus in conflict some 
compromise must be adopted. Just what compromise will 
prevail it would be idle to predict. 

Primary legislation has not yet attempted to do more than 
guarantee the honest casting and counting of votes. There 

* Act of April 25, 1895, 
t Act of March 13, 1897. 

1 Spier v. Baker, 120 Cal. Rep. 370. 

[356] 


Tendencies in Primary Legislation. 67 

has been, apparently, no general recognition of the fact that 
a system which strictly precludes fraud and corruption may 
nevertheless totally fail to reflect the sentiment of the 
majority. The method of selecting candidates—a matter 
of no less importance—has usually been disregarded. In 
some states the previously existing system is legally recog¬ 
nized ; but as a rule the whole matter is left to the discretion 
of the party committee. Throughout the southern states, 
the general practice is to nominate by direct popular vote, 
while in the north and west the convention plan prevails. 

If the analogy of the regular election should continue to 
guide legislatures, we may expect to see the direct vote 
made mandatory. But it is highly improbable that such a 
system would prove a final solution of the nominating 
problem. The direct vote, though possibly well adapted to 
the conditions of some southern states, where a relatively 
small upper class still maintains political leadership leaving 
to the rank and file of citizens only a yea or nay , is radically 
ill-suited to the more democratic conditions of the north, 
especially of the great cities. Its adoption would mark the 
formal abandonment of majority rule. A majority election 
by a heterogeneous body without natural leaders is rarely 
possible except after deliberation and a number of ballots; 
and even though we concede that the newspapers furnish a 
medium for ample discussion, it will hardly be contended 
that it would be practicable to hold successive primary 
elections until one candidate should receive a majority of 
the votes. Some form of indirect nomination appears, 
therefore, to be a necessity. Is it not possible to devise a 
system which will insure the election of a truly representa¬ 
tive convention? Upon this problem primary reformers 
should concentrate their efforts. 

Walter J. Branson. 

Philadelphia , Pa. 


table of primary election laws. 


(Brackets indicate that the act has been repealed, superseded or declared invalid 
by the courts.) 


ARKANSAS. 


1895. Act of April 20, 1895. Laws of’95, p. 240. Applies to the entire state ; optional 
with political parties; contains a few positive rules, but mainly 
restrictive. 

1897. Act of March 3, 1897. Laws of ’97, p. 44. Applies to the entire state ; man* 
datory ; contains restrictive regulations only. 


CALIFORNIA. 

1866. [Act of March 26,1866.] Laws of ’65-66, p. 438. Applies to the entire state ; 

optional with political parties ; prescribes the method of conducting 
primaries. 

1874. Political Code of 1874. Title ii, Chap. iv. Applies to the entire state; 

optional with political parties ; prescribes the method of conducting 
primaries. 

1874. Act of March 26, 1879. Amendments to the Code, 1873-74, p. 191. Amends 
the foregoing. 

1895. [Act of March 27, 1895.J Laws of *95, p. 207. Applies to counties of 8,000 and 
over ; mandatory , makes the conduct of primaries a state function. 

1897. [Act of March 13, 1897.J Laws of ’97, p. 115. Applies to the entire state; 
otherwise nearly identical with the foregoing act. 

COLORADO. 

1887. Act of April 4, 1887. Laws of ’87, p. 347. Applies to the entire state ; manda¬ 
tory ; contains restrictive regulations only. 

CONNECTICUT. 

1883. Act of May 1,1883. Laws of ’83, p. 304. Applies to the entire state; manda¬ 
tory ; contains restrictive regulations only. 

DELAWARE. 

1887. [Act of March 29, 1887.] Vol. xviii, Part I, p. 59. Applies to New Castle 
county ; mandatory ; prescribes the method of conducting primaries. 

1897. Act of May 27, 1897. Vol. xx, Part 2, p. 375. Applies to New Castle county; 
mandatory ; prescribes the method of conducting primaries. 

FLORIDA. 

1897. Act of June 11, 1897. Laws of ’97, p. 62. Applies to the entire state ; optional 
with political parties ; prescribes the method of conducting primaries. 

GEORGIA. 

1887. Act of October 22, 1887. Laws of ’87, p. 42. Applies to the entire state ; man¬ 
datory ; contains restrictive regulat ons only. 

1891. Act of October 21, 1891. Laws of ’go-’gi, p. 210. Applies to the entire state ; 
mandatory ; prescribes a few rules to govern primaries. 

[358] 


Table of Primary Election Eaws. 


69 


ILLINOIS. 

1885. [Act of June 22, 1885.] Laws of ’85, p. 188. Applies to the entire state; 

optional with political parties; prescribes the method of conducting 
primaries. 

1885. Act of June 29, 1885. Laws of *85, p. 187. Applies to the entire state ; manda¬ 
tory ; restrictive regulation. 

1889. Act of June 6, 1889. Laws of ’89, p. 140. Applies to the entire state (except 
as superseded by the following act) ; mandatory; prescribes the method 
of conducting primaries. 

1898. Act of February 10, 1898. Laws of ’98 (extra session), p. 11. Applies to the 
entire state ; mandatory in counties of 125,000 and over, optional in other 
counties , makes the conduct of primaries a state function. 

INDIANA. 

1889. Act of March 9, 1889. E. S., 1889. p. 83. Applies to the entire state; manda¬ 

tory ; contains restrictive regulations only. 

IOWA. 

1898. Act of April 7, 1898. Laws of ’98, p. 59. Applies to the entire state ; manda¬ 
tory ; contains restrictive regulations only. 

KANSAS. 

1891. Act of March 10, 1891. Laws of ’91, p.194. Applies to the entire state; 

optional with political parties; prescribes the method of conducting 
primaries. 

KENTUCKY. 

1880. [Act of April 19, 1880.] Laws of ’79-'8o, Vol. ii, p. 469. Applies to Harrison, 
Bourbon, Campbell and Kenton counties ; optional with political parties ; 
prescribes the method of conducting primaries. 

1888 . [Act of March 26, 1888.] Laws of’87-88, Vol. ii, p. 452. Applies to Franklin 
county; mandatory ; contains restrictive regulations only. 

1890. [Act of March 27, 1890.] Laws of ’Sg-’go, Vol. i, p. 959 The Act of April 19, 

1880, extended to Bracken county. 

1890. [Act of April 29, 1890.] Laws of ’89-’90, Vol. ii, p. 1570. The Act of April 19, 
1880, extended to Pendleton county. 

1892. Act of June 30, 1892. Laws of’91-92-93. P-106. Applies to the entire state; 

mandatory ; prescribes the method of conducting primaries. 

LOUISIANA. 

1890. Act of July 5, 1890. Laws of ’90, p. 62. Applies to the entire state ; manda¬ 
tory ; restrictive regulations only. 

MAINE. 

1887. Act of March 3, 1887. Laws of ’87, p. 39. Applies to cities of 25,000 and over ; 

mandatory ; prescribes rules to be observed at primaries. 

1897. Act of March 26, 1897. Laws of ’97, p. 353. Applies to cities of less than 25,- 
000 : mandatory ; prescribes rules to be observed at primaries. 

MASSACHUSETTS. 

1888. [Act of May 29, 1888.] Laws of ’88, p. 516. Applies to the entire state ; optional 

with political parties ; prescribes rules to be observed at caucuses. 

1890. [Act of June 6, 1S90.] Laws of ’90, p. 353. Administrative provision. 

1893. [Act of June 5, 1893. Sections 71-4, 297 and 320. J Laws of’93, p. 1153. Applies 

to the entire state; mandatory, prescribes the method of conducting 
caucuses. 

[359] 


70 


Annans of the American Academy. 


1894. [Act of June 22, 1894.] Laws of ’94, p. 617. Mandatory in Boston ; optional in 

other cities and towns • prescribes the method of conducting caucuses. 

1895. [Act of June 5, 1895.] Laws of ’95, p. 582. Applies to the entire state ; man¬ 

datory ; prescribes the method of conducting caucuses and the system of 
party organization. 

1895. [Act of June 5, 1895.] Laws of ’95, p. 626. Mandatory in Boston ; optional 

with political parties in other cities and towns ; prescribes the method 
of conducting caucuses. 

1896. [Act of February 25, 1896.] Laws of ’96, p. 72. Amendment to the foregoing 

act. 

1896. [Act of May 25, 1896.] Laws of *96, p. 391. Ditto. 

1896. [Act of June 4, 1896.] Laws of ’96, p. 457, Section 13. Administrative 

provision, 

1897. [Act of June 12, 1897.] Laws of ’97, p. 572. Amendments to the foregoing 

acts. 

1898. Act of June 21, 1898. Laws of ’98, p. 541. Codification of laws relating to 

caucuses and elections. 

MICHIGAN. 

1887. Act of June 28, 1887. Public acts of ’87, p. 416. Applies to the entire state ; 

mandatory ; prescribes a few positive rules, but mainly restrictive. 

1893. Act of May 31, 1893. Public acts of ’93, p. 274. Amendment to the foregoing 
act. 

1895. Act of May 13, 1895. Public acts of ’95, p. 264. Applies to cities of 15,000- 
150,000 ; mandatory ; prescribes the method of conducting primaries. 

1895. Act of May 16, 1895. Local acts of ’95, p. 348. Applies to Wayne county 
(Detroit) ; mandatory; prescribes the method of conducting primaries. 

MINNESOTA. 

"1887. [Act of March 8, 1887, Sections 99-104.] Laws of ’87, p. 38. Applies to the entire 
state ; mandatory ; prescribes a few positive rules, but mainly restrictive. 
1889. [Act of April 4, 1889 ] I,aws of ’89, p. 38. Sections 89 to 93 are identical with 
Sections 99 to 104 of the foregoing act. 

1895. Act of April 25, 1895. Laws of ’95, p. 661. Applies to the entire state, man¬ 
datory; prescribes the method of conducting primaries. 

1897. Act of April 14, 1897. Laws of ’97, p. 261. Amendment to the foregoing act. 
1897. Act of April 19, 1897. Laws of ’97, p. 273. Ditto. 

MISSISSIPPI. 

1892. Annotated Code of 1892.. Chap. 105. Applies to the entire state ; mandatory; 

prescribes the method of conducting primaries and the system of party 
organization. 

MISSOURI. 

1889. Revised Statutes of 1889. Art 4 . Chap. 60. Applies to the entire state ; man¬ 
datory; contains restrictive regulations only. 

1891. Act of April 18, 1891. Laws of’91, p. 136. Applies to cities of 300,000 and 
over; mandatory; makes the conduct of primaries a state function. 

1893. Act of April 19, 1893. Laws of ’93, p. 165. The foregoing act amended and 

extended to cities of 100,000. 

1897. Act of March 5, 1897. Laws of ’97, p. 117. Applies to cities of 300,000 and over ; 
mandatory; similar to Act of April 18, 1891. 

[360] 


Table of Primary Election Taws. 


7 * 


MONTANA. 

1895. Montana Annotated Codes. Vol. i, p. 179. Applies to the entire state; man¬ 
datory ; contains a few positive rules, but mainly restrictive. 

NEBRASKA. 

1887. Act of March 26, 18S7. Laws of ’87, p. 454. Applies to the entire state; 
mandatory; contains a lew positive rules, but mainly restrictive. 

NEVADA. 

1883. Act of February 5, 1883. Laws of ’83, p. 28. Applies to the entire state; 
mandatory; prescribes a few positive rules, but mainly restrictive. 

NEW JERSEY. 

1878. Act of March 27, 1878. Laws of ’78, p. 178. Applies to the entire state ; 
mandatory; restrictive regulation. 

1883. Act of March 23, 1883. Laws of ’83, p. 171. Applies to the entire state ; 

mandatory; contains restrictive regulations only. 

1884. Act of May 9, 1884. Laws of ’84, p. 323. Applies to the entire state; manda¬ 

tory; requires primary election officers to qualify. 

NEW YORK. 

1866. [Act of April 24, 1866.] Laws of '66, p. 1687. Applies to the entire state; 
mandatory; contains restrictive regulations only. 

1882. [Act of May 13, 1882.] Laws of ’82, p. 188 Applies to counties containing 

cities of 200,000 and over, except the county of New York ; mandatory; 
prescribes rules to be observed at primaries. 

1883. [Act of May n, 1883.] Laws of ’83, p. 560. Extends the foregoing to the 

entire state 

1887. [Act of May 2, 1887.] Laws of ’87, p. 329. Applies to cities of 10,000 and over ; 

mandatory; prescribes the method of conducting primaries. 

1890 [Act of A.pril 14, 1890.] Laws of *90, p. 294. Amends the foregoing. 

1892. [Act of May 18, 1892.] Laws of ’92, Vol. ii, p. 1618. Codification of election 
laws. Sections 50-55 contain the positive provisions in force at primaries. 
The provisions previously applied to cities of 10,000 and over are extended 
to cities of 5.000. 

1892 Act of May 19, 1892. Laws of ’92, Vol. i, p. 1432. Codification of the penal 
provisions relating to primaries. 

1895. Act of May 23, 1895. Laws of ’95, Vol. i, p. 475. Amends the Act of May 19, 

1892. 

1896. Act of May 27, 1896. Laws of ’96, Vol. i, p. 893. The provisions of the Act of 

May 18, 1892, re-enacted. 

1897. Act of April 15, 1897. Laws of ’97, Vol. i, p. 120. Amends the Act of May 19, 

1892. 

1898. Act of March 29, 1898. Laws of’98, p. 331. Mandatory in cities of the first 

and second class, optional in cities of the third and fourth class; pre¬ 
scribes the system of party organization; and makes the conduct of 
primaries a public function. 

NORTH DAKOTA. 

1885. Act of March 13, 1885. Dakota Ter. Laws of ’85, p. 44. Applies to the entire 

state , mandatory; restrictive regulation. 

1890. Act of March 20, 1890. Laws of ’90, p. 330. Applies to the entire state; 
mandatory; restrictive regulation. 

[361] 


72 


Annals of the American Academy. 


OHIO. 

1871. | Act of February 24. 1871.] Laws of ’71, p. 27. Applies to the entire state ; 

optional with political parties ; prescribes the method of conducting 
primaries. 

[1872. Act of February 29, 1872.] Laws of ’72, p. 196. Amends the foregoing act. 
1874. [Act of April 20, 1874 ] Laws of ’74, p. 104. Ditto. 

1874. [Act of April 20, 1874.] Laws of ’74, p. 113. Supplements Act of February 24, 
1871. 

1877. [Act of May 3, 1877.] Laws of ’77, p. 163. Repeals Act of April 20, 1874. (Laws 
of’74, p. 104.) 

1879. [Act of May 1, 1879.] Laws of ’79, p. 75. Applies to the entire state; manda¬ 

tory; contains restrictive regulations only. 

1880. R. S. of 1880. Sections 2916-21 and 7039-44 contain a codification of the fore¬ 

going acts. 

1885. Act of May 2, 1885. Laws of ’85, p. 224. Amends R. S., Sections 7039, 7041. 

1886. Act of May 17, 1886. Laws of ’86, p. 190. Supplements R. S.. Sections 2917, 

2919. Applies to cities of the first grade of the first class ; optional with 
political parties ; makes the conduct of primary elections a public 
function. 

1888. Act of April 16, 1888. Laws of’88, p. 337. The supplementary provisions of 

the Act of May 17, 1886, revised and extended to cities of the second grade 
of the first class and the first and second grades of the second class. 

1889. Act of April 15, 1889. Laws of ’89, p. 363. Amends R. S., Sections 7039, 7041. 

1894. Act of May 18, 1894, Laws of ’94, p.769. Applies to counties containing a 

city of the third grade of the second class (Butler county) ; mandatory; 
makes the conduct of primaries a public function. 

1896. Act of April 18, 1896. Laws of’96, p. 193. Amends R. S., Section 2919. 

1896. Act of April 27, 1896. Laws of’96, p. 377. Supplements R. S., Section 2921. 

1898. Act of April 25, 1898. Laws of ’98^.652. Applies to counties containing a 
„ city of the first grade of the first class (Cincinnati); mandatory; makes 
the conduct of primaries a public function. 

OREGON. 

1891. Act of February 11, 1891. Laws of ’91, p. 4. Applies to cities of 2,500 and 
over ; mandatory; prescribes the method of conducting primaries. 

PENNSYLVANIA. 

:88i. Act of June 8, 1S81. Laws of ’81, p. 70. Applies to the entire state ; manda¬ 
tory; restrictive regulations only. 

1881. Act of June 29, 1881. Laws of ’81, p. 128. Applies to the entire state ; man¬ 

datory; requires primary election officers to qualify. 

1883. Act of June 13, 1883. Laws of ’83, p. 92. Applies to the entire state ; manda¬ 
tory; restrictive regulation. 

SOUTH CAROLINA. 

1888. Act of December 22, 1888. Laws of '88, p. 10. Applies to the entire state ; 

mandatory; prescribes a few rules to govern primaries. 

1896. Act of March 9, 1896. Laws of ’g6-'<^7, p. 56. Applies to counties of 40,000 and 
over ; mandatory; supplements the foregoing act. 

TEXAS. 

1895. Act of April 8, 1895. Laws of ’95, p. 40. Applies to the entire state ; manda¬ 

tory; contains restrictive regulations only. 

[362] 


Table of Primary Election Laws. 


73 


VIRGINIA. 

1892. Act of March 3, 1892. Laws of ’9i-’92, p. 1027. Applies to the city of Ports¬ 
mouth ; mandatory; prescribes the method of conducting primaries. 

1894. [Act of February 23, 1894 ] Laws of '93-94, p. 417. Applies to the city of 

Richmond ; mandatory; practically identical with Portsmouth act. 

1896. Act of February 20, 1896. Laws of ’95-’96, p. 414. Applies to Henrico county 
(Richmond) ; mandatory; an elaboration of the foregoing act. 

1896 Act of March 3, 1896. Laws of ’95-’96, p. 684. Applies to the counties of 
Accomac and Northampton , mandatory; practically identical with 
Portsmouth act. 

1898. [Act of January 4, 1898.] Laws of’97-’98, p. 25. Applies to the city of Char¬ 
lottesville ; mandatory; prescribes method of conducting primaries. 

1898. Act of January 12, 1898. Laws of 'gj-’gS, p. 56. Applies to the city of Char¬ 
lottesville ; mandatory; an abridgment of the Henrico county act. 

WASHINGTON. 

1890. Act of March 27, 1890. Laws of ’90, p 490. Applies to the entire state; 

optional with political parties; prescribes the method of conducting 
primaries. 

1895. Act of March 21, 1895. Laws of ’95, p. 361. Applies to incorporated cities and 

towns; mandatory; prescribes the method of conducting primaries. 

WEST VIRGINIA. 

1891. Act of March 5, 1891. Laws of ’91, p. 175. Applies to the entire state; 

optional with political parties ; contains a few positive rules, but mainly 
restrictive. 


WISCONSIN. 

1891. [Act of April 24, 1891.] Laws of ’91, p. 633. Applies to counties of over 
150,000; mandatory; prescribes the method of conducting primaries. 

1893. [Act of April 27, 1893.] Laws of ’93, p. 310. Applies to counties of over 
200,000 ; mandatory; similar to the foregoing act. 

1895. [Act of April 19, 1895.] Laws of ’95, p. 560. Applies to counties of over 
2oo,coo ; mandatory; similar to the foregoing act. 

1897. Act of April 23,1897. Laws of ’97, p.691. Mandatory in counties of 200,000 and 
over, and in cities of the first and second class ; optional in cities of the 
third and fourth class; similar to the foregoing act. 

WYOMING. 

1891. Act of January 7, 1891. Laws of ’go-’gi, p. 148. Applies to the entire state ; 

optional with political parties; prescribes positive rules to govern 
primaries. 


THE ACADEMY AND ITS WORK. 

The American Academy of Poeiticae and Sociae Science was formed 
in Philadelphia, December 4, 1889, for the purpose of promoting the political 
and social sciences, and was incorporated February 14, 1891. 

While it does not exclude any portion of the field indicated in its title, yet 
its chief object is the development of those aspects of the political and social 
sciences which are either entirely omitted from the programs of other societies, 
or which do not at present receive the attention they deserve. Among such 
objects may be mentioned : Sociology, Comparative Constitutional and Admin¬ 
istrative Law, Philosophy of the State, Municipal Government, and such por¬ 
tions of the field of Politics, including Finance and Banking, as are not 
adequately cultivated by existing organizations. 

In prosecuting the objects of its foundation, the Academy has held meetings 
and engaged extensively in publication. 

MEMBERSHIP. 

“Any person may become a member of the Academy who having been 
proposed by a member shall be approved by the Council.”— Constitution , 
Article IV. 

Persons interested in the study of political, social and economic questions, 
or in the encouragement of scientific research along these lines, are eligible 
to membership and will be nominated upon application to the Membership 
Committee of the Council, American Academy, Station B, Philadelphia. 

There is no Initiation Fee. Annual Dues, $5. Life Membership Fee, $100. 

MEETINGS. 

Public meetings have been held from time to time at which the members of 
the Academy and others interested might listen to papers and addresses touching 
upon the political and social questions of the day. The meetings have been 
addressed by leading men in academic and practical life, a wide range of topics 
has been discussed, and the papers have generally been subsequently published 
by the Academy. 

The first scientific session of the Academy was held on March 14, 1890 ; 
three other sessions were held in 1890 ; seven in 1891; five in 1892 ; five in 1893 ; 
six in 1894 ; four in 1895 ; six in 1896 ; eight in 1897, and eight in 1898, or fifty- 
three in all. 

PUBLICATIONS. 

Since the foundation of the Academy, a series of publications has been 
maintained, known as the Annaes of the American Academy of Political and 
Social Science and the Supplements thereto. These publications have brought 
home to members accurate information and carefully considered discussions of 
all the questions embraced within the field of the Academy’s interests. The 
Annaes is sent to all members of the Academy. 

ANNALS. 

The Annaes was first issued as a quarterly, but since the second volume 
it has appeared as a bi-monthly. At the present time, the Annaes comprises 
two volumes of about 500 pages each per annum. The thirteen volumes thus 
far issued comprise 52 numbers, constituting with the supplements 9,302 pages 
of printed matter which have been distributed to the members of the Academy. 

Besides the larger papers contributed by many eminent scholars both at 
home and abroad, especial attention has been directed to the departments. All 
important books are carefully reviewed or noticed by specialists. The depart¬ 
ment of Personal Notes keeps the reader informed of movements in the academic 
and scientific world. Notes upon Municipal Government and Sociology preserve 
a careful record of events and other matters of interest in these subjects, 
which at the present time claim so large a share of public attention. 


To persons not members of the Academy, the price of Vols. I.-V., 
including supplements, is $6.00 a volume, and of Vols. VI. XIII, #3.00 each. 
Separate numbers #1.00 each. Special rates to Libraries, Vols. I.-V., $ 5.00 
each ; Vols. VI.-XIII, $2.50 each. 

Members are entitled to discounts varying from 16% per cent to 20 per 
cent on orders for back numbers or duplicate copies of publications. All cur¬ 
rent publications are sent to members free of charge. 



The American Academy 

OF 

Political and Social Science 

PHILADELPHIA 


President* 

EDMUND J. JAMES, Ph. D., University of Chicago. 


Vice-Presidents , 

SAMUEL M. LINDSAY, Ph. D., 

University of Pennsylvania. 


F. H. GIDDINGS, Ph. D., 
Columbia University. 


WOODROW WILSON, Ph. D., 
Princeton University. 


Corresponding Sec’y, 

L S. ROWE, Ph D., 
University of Pennsylvania. 


Secretaries. 


General Secretary, 

JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, Ph.D., 
37th and Locust Streets. 


Recording Sec'y, 

CLINTON ROGERS WOODRUFF, 
514 Walnut Street 


Treasurer, 

STUART WOOD, 
400 Chestnut Street. 


Librarian , 

JOHN L STEWART, 
Lehigh University. 


GENERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE. 


RT, HON. ARTHUR J. BALFOUR, M. P., 
London, England. 

PROF. C. F. BASTABLE, 

Dublin University. 

PROF. F. W. BLACKMAR, 

University of Kansas. 

SIR JOHN BOURINOT, K.C.M.G., D.C.L.. 
Ottawa, Canada. 

PROF R. T ELY, 

Wisconsin University. 

PROF. HENRY W. FARNAM, 

Yale University. 

PROF. W. W. FOLWELL, 

University of Minnesota. 

HON. LYMAN J. GAGE, 

Washington, D. C. 

DR. KARL T. von INAMA-STERNEGG, 
Vienna, Austria. 

PROF. JOHN K. INGRAM. LL.D. 

Trinity College, Dublin. 

PROF. J. W. JENKS, 

Cornell University. 


DR. WM PRESTON JOHNSTON, 

President of Tulane University. 

VERY REV. JOHN J. KEANE, D.D., 
Rome, Italy. 

PROF. E LEVASSEUR, 

Paris, France. 

PROF. AUGUST MEITZEN, 

University of Berlin. 

PROF. BERNARD MOSES, 

University of California. 

DR. HENRY WADE ROGERS, 

President Northwestern University. 

PROF. HENRY SIDGWICK, 

Cambridge University. 

PROF. WILLIAM SMART, LL.D., 
University of Glasgow. 

SIMON STERNE. Esq., 

New York City. 

HON. HANNIS TAYLOR, LL. D„ 

Mobile, Ala. 

PROF. LESTER F. WARD, 

Washington, D. C. 




He Foreign Policy of tye United States 

POLITICAL AND COMMERCIAL 

— 


Addresses and Discussions at the Annual Meeting 
of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 
April 7, 8, 1899. 


PAGES, 215. PRICE, $1.00. CLOTH, $1.50. 


ADDRESSES BY 

His Excellency the Chinese Minister, Wu Ting-fang. 

Hon. Carl Schurz, New York. 

Professor Theodore S. Woolsey, Yale University. 

Worthington C. Ford, Boston. 

Hon. John Bassett Moore, Columbia University. 

Robert T. Hill, Washington. 

DISCUSSION BY 

A. Lawrence Lowell, Harvard University; Professor E. W. Huffcut, Cornell 
University; Frederick Wells Williams, Yale University; W. Alleyne Ireland, 
London ; Professor L. M. Keasbey, Bryn Mawr College; John Foord, New York ; 
Dr. Talcott Williams, Philadelphia; Dr. W. P. Wilson, Philadelphia, and Professors 
E. R. Johnson and L. S. Rowe, University of Pennsylvania. 

TITLES OF SECTIONS 

The Government of Dependencies. 

Militarism and Democracy. 

The Commercial Relations of the United States with the Far East. 
The Political Relations of the United States with the Far East. 


American Academy of Political and Social Science 

STATION B. PHILADELPHIA 
















































































































































































































































* 











































































































































































. 







■ 



































. 












































































































































































































* 




























. 





























































































































































































































































































































































































* 


H 282 83 

















































































• * 


( 


1 


I 




I 




/ 

* 

\ 

\ 




l 

» 











$ 


i 


* 

V 


> 

4 






5 • • 


S> » 

*♦ •* 
l v « 

^ '»• aV-V - 

o * AV >*\k • 

'o. * * A <**'..« < v 

'% °o V .A^V *+ C 0 ^ ‘• l " < ° 

*. **o« . 




O 
h 

• 0 

0 0^ 



' A^j. ’'‘SM^-’ «5°- 4 0 ^ , w/rar 

.-.„ v^'-’V 

fA A ,.., **fe» 0 V- . ,.<v O V % » s 

«P V A .VSflEXh V A* .vw*’. *. A 



^ <£* «» 

• " * 

C 0* ,vW* '°o A 

--O' .Mre&tf*’ ’bv^ • 

i° ’’V, 

•’ A 0 ' V C <V '*•-»’' A°° ^ '*>’■ A . 

VT *> ^ av *V_°* ^ V % * 5 

^ ^ *♦ 'jfifr* % / 4 \m/a'o ’■* a . 

w \ 1 SR* /% \ 

/N > . t ^ A ^*) 

<*V f.° O 




A v«* : 

■‘ v ** • 

* A <* */?yi % <o v "o. ' 

A o 0 w °« cr * 1 ' * * o 

A* V o u ♦* 

; «* : 


o y 



s° ^° ^ . 

<v> ^ 

N ° V' \ 

<o **•«?* > V » 

./ * 



+ ° ^ 
* ^ A 


\ r <* '' 
** .°j^ % ^ 


O H 0 




«K A *■ 

^ ^ * 

^ S * 


: “oyw: ^ v % 

* ,0 V ‘ ^O, '..,*■* A 

rF . »• • • * ^o A % c 0 w ® - 

o t — - o A / 

* '•b v^ : 

o \0 vV 

O '^W-' o * %. ** • 

o#. *•*•’ A 0 ^ *•*’• A 



$ •% ^yd 


<, ,6' o ' 

r. u o 


v’> 


1*0 



.5 V A, o. 


1 
















ii'iute^ * r %V' * 


V S 

> ^ '..« » -« 

♦ A 

• l '** ^o av 6 

o ^ • 

: •*> k : 

° *° ■%. • 

,* O o ** 

aV o> * # ■» • 

v> <£* *>Va!' ^ \ 

«' -«®k ^ 



V V ' * 

’ ■ .■& 1 

° **& * 

’ *. 

V c. 0 N a * <$> ~V If* 

«*• 4 J /* V f ^ ^ * 

* V. 0 ■* o 




O w o 



*<2ft 



A v** : 

/ ^ ^ 

A" 0 N . < v* 



° >° %. %. 

A v fQ* 9 $ 1 43 

a V >i 5 f ^ aO* ^ v 

* •***• \/ m * 

oWW. A V** '■SSM22* 

J 5 «•> * vJJ&AT * AV 

* ^ *> %^>*v 

<*'••’ <° 

/* 

NJL «<* r? 




&' c 


4 O. 

.•0. «* 

*.,,*- Vf °o '. 

v < » « 


<b *<T. - _ 

♦ ^ n v c , i»* * *P t 

c u * 

* ^ o* 



*■*’ a 0 " v'*• ’ ./ °o * -o Vo* c 
-#> A *i\?* > v' *C> , 0 ^ 



r .* ^ v % ‘W*“ /\ \ 

‘••. *o, V <% ‘‘‘** < ’V" , V° . — . %'"‘\<P :>'.% 

A 'V c /jfjff^;, ° .4* ,* ' 

*. *^o* - Mm ^: W • 



o V 



9 0" <#V **_» 


* «> cv ^ 

«» V v % O, .0 

^ <*> Tj. x*^ ^ M ^ « 


v-V - 
<<> • 



'V • 

■ ■% ° 



.° A 

l V (. ^ * o* V 




O . 'o * » • 


k » * 



^ AUG 83 



N. MANCHESTER 
INDIANA 46962 



V"V : 

v %• \ 

/ + 4 

<& 0 ° N ® ♦ 

’i# • 




* 



* 

<1^ ,J ?f> o 

^ ^ ^ ° 
11 JjT \D 

,0 V ..*■* 

: ^ o* " 

♦ N. v - * 




















